"War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength." — George Orwell, from the book 1984, published in 1949.
In the book 1984, the totalitarian government known as "Big Brother", uses high technology and cleverly crafted language known as "Newspeak" to control the minds of the masses. In that fictional world, any person thinking about notions of freedom or revolution was punished with torture or severe brainwashing. You see, in that world, thinking about true freedom was considered a "thoughtcrime". So Big Brother used "Newspeak" to get people to think in narrow terms, limiting the range of thought, in order to make "thoughtcrime" impossible.
I'm getting sick and tired of the Orwellian Newspeak. Just turn on the television, all you hear is Orwellian Newspeak. Nothing is as it seems.
Examples:
Nation Building
Lately I've been hearing pundits argue the pros and cons of "nation building". Sorry, I prefer the old term-- "colonialism". You see, when you invade and occupy a sovereign nation in an instance where they have not attacked you and thereafter kill and oppress their people for your national interests, its called colonialism. So even if I hear the mainstream media focusing on the negative aspects of "nation building", they already missed the point. Using the term "nation building" automatically removes the thought of colonialism from the discussion. With "nation building" as a starting point, all you're left to argue is whether its good or bad to "build nations". So how bad could it be?
You don't build a nation by killing and oppressing it's people, ruining it's infrastructure, and usurping its natural resources. Thats called "colonization". And you certainly don't build nations by introducing radioactive material to the population. This brings us to........
Depleted Uranium
Your television will never mention the topic of depleted uranium. Depleted Uranium (DU) is a dense, radioactive metal used for armor-piercing shells. American tanks and A-10's fired DU munitions all over Iraq, littering the Iraqi terrain with an estimated 75 tons of DU shells. (These shells have been found to contain traces of Plutonium, which is the most toxic substance we know of. With a half-life of 4.5 billion years, Iraq is destined to be a radioactive nightmare for the rest of human history.)
Beside the fact that our media rarely discusses depleted uranium, when it does get mentioned, it's misleadingly called "depleted uranium". That's Orwellian newspeak again. It should really be called what it is-- "Enriched Uranium".
The term 'depleted' refers to the removal of uranium-235, but the process for its removal is called 'enrichment'. It is enrichment because what remains is uranium-238, a highly potent radioactive carcinogen that emits alpha particles. Once in our body, either inhaled, or in a flesh wound, or even ingested in contaminated food or water --- you get cancer in your lungs bones, blood or kidneys (Caldicott, 2002). There is one more way, the uranium is enriched. Uranium-236 and Uranium-238, otherwise known as Plutonium, is laced into the so-called 'depleted' uranium weaponry. — David M. Boje, Ph.D. (March 13, 2003).
Article comments
1 - Dave
How about the term woman's right to choose? This should be called a woman's right to choose to have her inconvenient fetus ground up right up until the time it starts coming out the birth canal.
This is to distinguish it from the nonexistent woman's right to choose to defend her non-aborted children with a firearm and woman's right to choose how and where her government-mandated retirement savings gets invested, not to mention the also-nonexistent woman's right to choose where her non-aborted children go to school with the government-mandated taxes she pays. Let's not even bother to mention a woman's right to choose to leave her life's savings to her non-aborted children after she dies without the government grabbing most of it.
2 - Shark
Dave, take a deep breath, breathe deep, deep...
that's it, relax...
relax...
[Shark speaking like Mr. Rogers] Now Davey, no one's gonna come to your house, confiscate your arsenal, and put one of your .357 Magnums to your head and force you to have an abortion...
...relax...
3 - Shark
Bulldog, this essay is double plus good!
Shameless Plug Warning!
I wrote a similar piece 18 months ago. Bush Euphemisms. Thought you might enjoy.
(Amazing that Bush's world is still going on -- and getting worse)
4 - RedTard
"Uranium-236 and Uranium-238, otherwise known as Plutonium, is laced into the so-called 'depleted' uranium weaponry"
I hate to be the one to break the news to you but Plutonium is not and has never been another name for a isotope of Uranium. Please you and the doctor get your facts straight before you go into a tirade.
Also, DU has a halflife of 4.5 billion years which means even if we dumped 9,000,000,000 pounds of the stuff across Iraq only one pound per year would decay and produce radiation. The "nuclear" aspect of the DU usage is extremely tiny. The real problems are caused by it's heavy metal toxicity. Like many heavy metals it is highly toxic and can be harmful if the burning ammunition is inhaled or the particles are allowed into drinking water.
Your "nuclear" comparison to a dirty bomb is a cheap scare tactic and scientifically unsound. By posting rants such as this one you have lowered yourself to the same level as the straw man you are propagandizing against.
5 - RedTard
The main point of your post I can at least agree on. I wish government would name things to give us a clearer idea of what they are. Instead of an "energy" bill perhaps we could have an "overbloated pork handout to friends of our politicians" bill. Also, the same lame tactic is used by both sides of the aisle. "Affirmative action" gives a person absolutely no idea of what your talking about. It could more appropriately be called "institutionalized racial discrimination" but that would make it harder to vote for. It's also easier to say that your pro-choice than to say your for the killing of unborn children.
6 - The Bulldog Manifesto
RedTard,
Sorry charlie, I think you should do a bit more research into depleted uranium (ahem, enriched uranium) weaponry. Some, not all of it, contains plutonium. (http://www.firethistime.org/plutoniumcontamination.htm)
(http://www.fpx.de/fp/WebLog/2003/iraq-du.html)
(http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=03/04/07/0155201)
This is a verified fact.
And regardless, your post indicates that you aren't even disputing the danger of the weapon after the battle is over. Whether you or I are right about the composition of the DU shells, the fact is, the shells pose a horrible threat to our troops and the Iraqi civilians. (Uranium or Plutonium, its still quite deadly)
Over 8,000 people died of Gulf War syndrome after the first war. Just wait until the long term effects of this war are realized. I hate to be right in this instance, but.....
Our government knows the danger of the DU sheels, yet they use them anyway. Should come as no surprise though, this is the same government that has over the course of every war ignored its own veterans, even exposing them to nuclear fallout.
Feel free to defend our governmet. Its your right as an American.
7 - The Bulldog Manifesto
Shark,
I read your post. Thanks! Nice one!
I liked the euphemisms you came up with. "Terminal Vaccination"-- lol, just wait, they'll use it eventually.
8 - Dave Nalle
Several people have already covered this, but you're totally off-base on Depleted Uranium. Not only is it not plutonium, but the idea that alpha particles cause cancer is laughable. My TV gives off way more alpha particles than depleted uranium and I'm not a walking tumor. Human skin, paper or a couple of feet of air can disperse alpha particles. The danger from depleted uranium is NOT radioactivity, it's heavy metal poisoning, just like lead or mercury. If you ingest it or get it in your blood system it's bad for you.
The real radioactive threat in Iraq is the 500,000kg of Yellowcake which Saddam had stockpiled. It's what you actually want to put in a dirty bomb - which means that Saddam did have a WMD suppy on hand. And it's dangerous both from prolonged surface exposure and when ingested.
Dave
9 - Bob A. Booey
Yellowcake?
Are you drinking the Kool-Aid today or what?
I officially give up on communicating with you. Oy vey, you're hopeless.
Rabid, closed-minded ideologue, just as I suspected, incapable of seeking out objective information or seeing past your ridiculously simple fears.
That is all.
10 - Bob A. Booey
I hope that was a joke or a humorless, outraged white male's attempt at satire or you're further gone than I thought.
That is all.
11 - The Bulldog Manifesto
Yellowcake? Are you fucking kidding me man? WHAT YELLOWCAKE??!?!?!
Wake up dude. Its 2005. There is no yellowcake and never was any yellowcake in Iraq.
Where the hell are you getting your news dude?
Its funny how you'll play word games with my post. Its not even worth discussing it with you though now that you try to mention yellowcake. You've forever ruined any hope of actual discussion with that position.
YELLOWCAKE?!?!?!?
Unreal.
12 - Al Barger
Probably the more relevant Orwell for this would be the classic essay "Politics and the English Language."
It seems however that Bulldog wants not so much to describe things more accurately so much as to find terms that favor his side.
Wonder what Orwell would have made of Michael Moore?
13 - The Bulldog Manifesto
Al Barger,
Is that you Bill O'Reilly? Invoking the name Michael Moore. Are you going to ask me now whether I'm on "his side" or the "president's side"?
Believe it or not, but I am my own person. Just like you should be your own person. If you want me to lump you in with Rush Limbaugh or other ignorant talking heads, I'll bite. BUt where will that take us?
You see, you are arguing for a side. I am arguing for whats right. I love the democrats as much as I love the republicans. They are just two sides to what has become a faulty system of elitist exploitation.
The way things are now, regardless of who is in power, there is always half the country devotedly supporting the thieves in office. How perfect is that for the people who are robbing us blind? They always have somebody like you on their side to defend them.
You root for your political party like your rooting for a football team. Congrats.
14 - Al Barger
Easy there, Bulldog. Why all the hostility, brother? For starters, I didn't say anything at all about the president or any particular political issue here.
Nor did I mean to hang Michael Moore around your neck, though perhaps I was a bit sloppy in expressing it. You tend to be, in my judgement, somewhat ideological blindered. Some would say the same of me, not realizing that I am in fact the very definition of fair and balanced.
I invoked Michael Moore more or less completely independent of you though, and did not mean to accuse you of his crimes. You're maybe a little blindered, but Moore's just a goddam dishonest demagogue liar, in part playing exactly the kind of language games Orwell describes. I was picking him for an example.
I wouldn't consider it that bad to be compared to Limbaugh, though. He's got his better and worser points, but I consider him a perfectly respectable broadcaster.
If anything though, I'ma pin O'Reilly on YOUR side, buddy. Bastard's not on MY side, I can tell you that.
As to rooting for my political party, I don't know what one you mean there, or how you got that out of my comments at all.
15 - Shark
Big Al is a Libertarian -- the only political party in America that's MORE MARGINALIZED than the Democrats.
"I am in fact the very definition of fair and balanced." -- Al B.
Me too, but I can't use it because it's trademarked!
16 - Shark
Bulldog, thought I'd let you know the latest active euphemism in the repertoire:
Bush Administration lingo: "Iraqi Constitution"
Reality-based Term: "Blueprint for Civil War"
Please use the proper Reality-Based Term in the future.
Thanks,
The Ministry of Clarity
17 - Dave Nalle
Did I REALLY just see two people deny that there was Yellowcake in Iraq? Why do you think we had suspected Saddam of buying Yellowcake from Niger? It was because he had bought it there twice before.
The fact is that there were about 500,000 kg of Yellowcake in Iraq and it was all recovered during the invasion. Subsequently about 26 barrels were lost and then mostly accounted for.
This isn't some sort of fantasy, it's a fact confirmed by the UN. Don't believe me, check the UN website at and the article on the missing Yellowcake at .
Don't get fooled by the propaganda, if they wanted to count the highly toxic Yellowcake as a WMD then Saddam had enough to poison a dozen US cities.
Dave
18 - Bob A. Booey
This has gotten old and I think you went off the deep end for a while here, but the IAEA itself discredited all reports of Iraq trying to buy yellowcake from Niger in recent years. We all know now the documents establishing that link were a forgery.
It's also common knowledge that Iraq had yellowcake it purchased from a few countries, including Niger, in the very early 1980s (between 1979 - 1983 or so). There's never been any evidence since that time, even through the Iran-Iraq war or the first Gulf War, that Iraq ever made any move to use that yellowcake for nuclear research or to sell it to terrorists.
There's no evidence that material was available to be weaponized in 2002 or 2003, in fact most of the nuclear energy agencies you cite conclude it was used in civilian energy programs instead. There's no way the international community was going to support a second Iraq war based on yellowcake purchases in the 1980s that everyone has known about.
The 500,000 kg figure isn't accurate because it's the entire amount Iraq had in the early 1980s. I'd imagine very little of that would have ever been available for use as a weapon and there's absolutely no evidence anyone ever had a uranium weapons program in Iraq. If Saddam had any beginnings of one, it was no doubt destroyed, along with most of the Iraqi military infrastructure, in the first Gulf War.
And he certainly didn't have the technological know-how or personnel to reconstitute nuclear weapons research by the time this Iraq war started.
The war was sold under the spectre of nuclear weapons -- there's clearly no evidence for that today and no reasonable person believes that, not even the most rabid right-wing ideologue. There's also no evidence Iraq had any interest in providing dirty bombs to terrorists in the mainstream foreign policy literature or among foreign policy academics.
The story you link is about emptied yellowcake barrels. Who cares? What's the point? I don't get it.
That is all.
19 - JR
Dave Nalle: My TV gives off way more alpha particles than depleted uranium and I'm not a walking tumor.
I think you should get a second opinion.
Seriously, though, your TV gives off alpha particles? As in helium nuclei? What did you pay for that thing?